I just spent three years driving around Africa. I visited 35 different countries all around the continent. [1]

The Chiense influence is staggering. I'm writing a book about it now. Many, many parts of Africa are developing faster than any of us can comprehend, because we've never seen it.

In the last ~20 years cities like LA and Vancouver have gotten bigger, but they're more or less what they were - there were skyscrapers, electricity, water, freeways etc. Now it's just a bit bigger.

There are hundreds of cities in Africa that have gone from dirt streets to modern city with skyscrapers, 4G internet, subways (or above ground rail), running water end electricity, etc. in just 10 years.

It boggles the mind

[1] http://theroadchoseme.com/africa-expedition-overview & http://instagram.com/theroadchoseme

> hundreds of cities with subways

No, there aren't. There is exactly one (1) city in sub-Saharan Africa with a modern urban rail system, and it's Addis Ababa, Ethiopia. In the rest of the continent's megacities (Nairobi, Lagos, etc) decent urban transit remains a dream. China has funded a bunch of long-distance rail, but that's primarily for trade (read: exporting raw materials).

But I still tip my pith helmet at you for crossing the DRC by Jeep!

While it's not surface light rail, I'd argue that the Gautrain in Johannesburg & Tshwane counts as a modern urban rail system, especially as it incorporates substantial subway sections.

Sorry, you're right, there aren't that many subways, but I stand by everything else I said

China is the African continent's largest trading partner.

Worth noting is that China's been trading with Africa since at least 200 BCE.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Africa%E2%80%93China_relations

so who owns all that brand new infrastructure - China?

Depends on the deal the government of whatever country made with China. In many cases China build tons of stuff (bridges, highways, rail, hydro plants, etc. etc.) and give them to the country typically in exchange for super cheap mineral rights. So then you come across immense swaths of forest that have been decimated, with all the timber being shipped to china. Same goes for monster mines all over the place.

In the case of Mozambique they gave away fishing rights to China.

The GDP growth rate per capita is a better measure in my opinion. The population of Ethiopia is growing very fast and despite the high GDP growth rate there is still serious concern about the job market for the nation's under 18 population about to hit the labour market.

In this case, it’s about the capability to finance a satellite, so absolute GDP is more relevant.

I'm actually going there in a exactly a month from now. I'll be staying there for ~5 weeks. Any advice on what to see or go do?

Here's a few things, in no particular order:

Some of my favorite spots in Addis:

1. National Museum of Ethiopia - Lucy and other early humans 2. Mount Entoto 3. Ethnological Museum - Haili Selassie's palace is here 4. Shiro Meda - street vendors. Take a Ethiopian friend to get the best deals. 5. Yod Abyssinian Traditional Restaurant - Traditional music and dancing. Worth going at least once. 6. Addis Ababa Golf Club - Fun place to catch lunch outdoors with some green space in Addis.

Outside:

1. Simien Mountains National Park 2. Church of Saint George 3. Blue Nile Falls 4. Danekil Depression

Awesome! Thank you so much for this list. I can't wait.

GDP per capita is still at $767, which is representative of the majority of the population earning a subsistence living.

Ethiopia has a population of 105 million, yet it has the gross scientific output of Latvia, a country of only 1.92 million:

https://www.natureindex.com/country-outputs/generate/All/glo...

What is growing is CO2 emissions, at 14.9 million tonnes. By contrast, Latvia emits only 8 million tonnes.

On a per-CO2 basis, Latvia is twice as efficient as Ethiopia in producing science. On a per-capita basis, Latvia is 55x as efficient.

The situation is the same across the world when you compare countries populated by Europeans or East-Asians against everyone else.

Obviously a country over 50x bigger is going to emit more CO2. At a minimum, they need to cook 50x more food, which they do with inefficient biomass or coal stoves.

A country with 50 times the population emits only twice as much CO2? This seems extremely good.

It's because they are much poorer.